DOCSLIB.ORG

What Sort of Input Is Needed for Intake?*

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
What Sort of Input Is Needed for Intake?* 28 Hongguang Ying WHAT SORT OF INPUT IS NEEDED FOR INTAKE?* Hongguang Ying University of Arizona In this paper, I first analyze Gass and Selinker's (1994) account of 'input' and 'intake'. I make 4 arguments: (1) without 'accessible input', 'frequency', 'prior knowledge', 'affect', 'attention' and 'negotiation' do not appear to be sufficient for 'comprehended input'; (2) 'prior knowledge' does not necessarily constitute the basis of comprehension in L2 learning; (3) 'comprehended input' does not have to be 'learner-controlled'; and (4) 'input' and 'intake' are not necessarily two fundamentally different phenomena. I then propose two concepts which I believe are essential for 'input' to become 'intake'. First, the learner needs to be provided with 'accessible input', which refers to "input in line with the learner's developmental stages or readiness"; and secondly, the learner needs to process and understand the 'input', hence ''processed input", which calls for the activation of learner factors (e.g., attention, affect, prior knowledge), the help of external factors (e.g., input processing instruction, input enhancement), and the interaction of both factors (e.g., negotiation). I. INTRODUCTION Much recent work in second language acquisition research has been concerned with the nature of linguistic input in L2 acquisition. Corder ( 1967: 165) made an important distinction between input and intake: ''The simple fact of presenting a certain linguistic form to a learner... does not necessarily qualify it for the status of input, for the reason that input is 'what goes in', not what is available for going in, and we may reasonably suppose that it is the learner who controls this input or more properly his intake." (original italics) Corder (1973) further drew the difference between 'input' and 'output': the 'input' is the syllabus taught and the 'output' the learner's grammatical competence at any particular point. Wagner-Gough and Hatch (1975) pointed out the importance of investigating the target language input if anything interesting could be said about the learner output. The input hypothesis and the 'acquisition' and 'learning' hypothesis by Krashen (1981, 1982, 1985) triggered more interest in the investigation of the role of input in second language acquisition. 1985 saw the publication of the first book (Gass & Madden 1985) exploring the nature of input from various perspectives. These studies examined the links between input and output, methodology in input, native-speaker and nonnative-speaker interactions, and non-native­ speaker and non-native speaker interactions (Larsen-Freeman 1985). Ellis (1985) looked at the theoretical perspectives on input in language acquisition, concentrating on three theories: behaviorist theories which view 'input' as 'stimulus' and the learner as 'a language producing machine', nativist theories which view 'input' merely as a trigger that activates the internal mechanism and the learner as 'a grand initiator', and interactionist theories which view language acquisition as the result of an interaction at the discourse level between the learner's mental abilities and the linguistic environment and 'input' as the role of affecting or being affected by the nature of the internal mechanisms. Ellis (1985) also reported research findings on the role of 'input' both in natural settings and in classroom settings in addition to discourse studies focusing on the negotiation of meaning. Most recent studies seem to focus on input processing (Van Patten & Cadierno 1993) and input enhancement (Sharwood-Smith 1991, White, et al 1991, Sharwood­ Smith 1993 ), both of which will be discussed in detail in the section dealing with 'processed input'. On the other hand, McLaughlin (1987, 1990) argues for a cognitive psychological approach to second language phenomena that looks at 'input' as syntactic and semantic cues and that emphasizes the importance of the development of automaticity and the process of restructuring. SLAT Student Association Working Papers Vol. 2, No.1 What Sort of Input is Needed for Intake? 29 Jacobs & Schumann (1992) state that learning takes place largely through "the perception of a stimulus, attention to that stimulus, the movement of the information in the stimulus into memory, and finally, the expression or use of that information." (p. 294). Gass and Selinker (1994), based on Gass (1988), proposed a model for second language acquisition with a clear focus on the role of input in SLA. This paper attempts to analyze Gass and Selinker's (1994) account of 'input' and 'intake' and proposes two concepts which I believe are essential for 'input' to become 'intake'. II. ANALYSIS OF GASS AND SELINKER'S ACCOUNT OF 'INPUT' & 'INTAKE' Gass and Selinker (1994) hold that the learning of a second language is a multifaceted endeavor and they propose a model which integrates linguistic, sociolinguistic, and psycholinguistic aspects of acquisition. Within Gass and Selinker's model, there are five levels in a learner's conversion of input to output: ( 1) apperceived input, (2) comprehended input, (3) intake, (4) integration, and (5) output, which are sketched as follows (for a complete figure, please refer to Gass & Selinker 1994:297): INPUT 0 APPERCEIVED INPUT 0 COMPREHENDED INPUT 0 INTAKE 0 INTEGRATION 0 OlITPUT My analysis will focus on the three levels of the model, namely, 'apperceived input', 'comprehended input' and 'intake'. According to Gass and Selinker, "input" refers to "a body of second language data" learners are exposed to (p.298). But not all of those language data are used by the learner when they form their L2 grammar. Some language data pass through to the learner and some do not The first stage, that of the passing through of the initial data is apperceived input (original italics), which refers to "bit oflanguage which is noticed in some way by the learner because of some particular features" (p.298). The authors discussed four factors enabling "some particular features" to be utilized for learning: (1) frequency, (2) affect, (3) prior knowledge, and (4) attention. They explain the four terms as follows: (1) 'frequency' consists of two aspects: (a) something which is very frequent in the input is likely to be noticed, and (b) something which is unusual because of its infrequency may stand out for a learner, particularly at a more advanced stages of learning, as in a new word or phrase, which may stand out and be noticed by the learner; (2) 'Affect' includes 'social distance, status, motivation, and attitude'; (3) 'prior knowledge' refers to 'knowledge of the native language, knowledge of other languages, existing knowledge of the second language, world knowledge, language universals, etc.; and (4) 'attention' is what allows a learner to notice a mismatch between what he or she produces/knows and what is produced by speakers of the second language. For Gass and Selinker, these four factors not only "may determine why or why not some input is noticed by the learner", but "contribute to the potentiality of comprehension of the input" (p.300). First of all, some of the explanations above do not seem to be very clear. For example, what exactly are "some particular features" in "a bit of language which is noticed in some way by the learner because of some particular features"? Next, it could be argued that although the four factors may contribute to 'apperceived input', they do not appear to be sufficient for 'comprehended input' if the 'input' is not accessible in the sense that the learner has no access to El Two Talk Fall 1994 30 Honggu.ang Ying the input because of its incomprehensibility and of the learner's lack of developmental readiness. In other words, they may not contribute to the potentiality of comprehension of the input without 'accessible input', the details of which will be discussed in section 3. The effect of the first factor 'frequency' has been very much discussed in Ll acquisition (Forster & Chambers 1973; Whaley 1978; Forster 1976, 1981, 1990). Forster (1976, 1981) argues that frequency affects 'lexical access' in, for example, the 'lexical decision task'. Forster (1976: 274) reports that the subjects' RTs (reaction times) in Bednall's experiment were found to be much faster to a high-frequency word pair such as finger-leg (645 milliseconds) than to a low­ frequency word pair such as bug-grub (754 milliseconds). The rationale behind this task, according to Forster (1990), is that the only way to tell whether a given letter sequence is a word or not is by seeing whether that sequence is associated with a previously stored representation (italics added). Thus the frequency effect is based on one's prior lexical knowledge. But if an L2 learner has no prior lexical knowledge of the word 'bug', for example, frequency may not help him/her comprehend the meaning of the new word at all, especially when it occurs in a syntactic structure s/he has never heard of before. I once worked full-time in a Korean company for three months and part-time for half a year in another Korean company. Apart from me, the other staff members were all Korean, including the owner. Although they talked to me in English, they conversed with each other in Korean. Despite the fact that it was spoken around me very frequently and it WAS 'apperceived', I was not able to comprehend Korean. The second factor of "affect" (i.e., social distance, motivation, and attitude) is undoubtedly an important factor contributing to the success or failure in second language acquisition. While Schumann (1978a, 1978b, 1988) argues for social and psychological distance as a determining factor for SLA, Gardner (1968, 1979, 1980, 1983, 1985, 1988) argues for instrumental and integrative motivation. But it could be argued that if the input itself is beyond the learner's accessibility, the 'affect' factor does not seem to contribute sufficiently to 'comprehended input'. A fitting example is the experience I narrated above.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • MSU Working Papers in Second Language Studies Volume 7
    MSU Working Papers in Second Language Studies Volume 7, Number 1 2015 3 MSU Working Papers in SLS 2016, Vol. 7 ISBELL, RAWAL, & TIGCHELAAR – EDITORS’ MESSAGE Editors’ Message: Seventh Volume of the MSU Working Papers in Second Language Studies The Editorial Team is pleased to introduce the 7th volume of the MSU Working Papers in Second Language Studies. The Working Papers is an open-access, peer-reviewed outlet for disseminating knowledge in the field of second language (L2) research. The Working Papers additionally has a two-layered formative aim. First, we welcome research that is “rough around the edges” and provide constructive feedback in the peer review process to aid researchers in clearly and appropriately reporting their research efforts. Similarly, for scholars working through ideas in literature reviews or research proposals, the peer review process facilitates critical yet constructive exchanges leading to more refined and focused presentation of ideas. Second, we extend an opportunity to in-training or early-career scholars to lend their expertise and serve as reviewers, thereby gaining practical experience on the “other side” of academic publishing and rendering service to the field. Of course, we also value the interviews with prominent L2 researchers and book/textbook reviews we receive, which provide a useful resource for L2 scholars and teachers. We must acknowledge (and in fact are quite glad to) that without the hard work of authors and reviewers, the Working Papers would not be possible. This volume of the Working Papers features two empirical research articles, a research proposal, a literature review, and two reviews. Before introducing these articles in detail, however, we wish to reflect on the history of the Working Papers by answering a simple question: What happens once an article is published in the Working Papers? Life after Publication As an open-access journal, the Working Papers lives on the internet, freely accessible by just about anyone.
    [Show full text]
  • Sentential Switching on Teaching Grammar
    Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Fen Fakültesi Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Science Fen Bilimleri Dergisi (CFD), Cilt:36, No: 3 Özel Sayı (2015) Science Journal (CSJ), Vol. 36, No: 3 Special Issue (2015) ISSN: 1300-1949 ISSN: 1300-1949 The Effect of Intra-sentential, Inter-sentential and Tag- sentential Switching on Teaching Grammar Atefeh ABDOLLAHI1,*, Ramin RAHMANY2, & Ataollah MALEKI3 2Ph.D. of TEFL, Department of Humanities, Faculty of Teaching English and Translation, Takestan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Takestan, Iran. Received: 01.02.2015; Accepted: 05.05.2015 ______________________________________________________________________________________________ Abstract. The present study examined the comparative effect of different types of code-switching, i.e., intra- sentential, inter-sentential, and tag-sentential switching on EFL learners grammar learning and teaching. To this end, a sample of 60 Iranian female and male students in two different institutions in Qazvin was selected. They were assigned to four groups. Each group was randomly assigned to one of the afore-mentioned treatment conditions. After the experimental period, a post-test was taken from students to examine the effect of different types of code- switching on students’ learning of grammar. The results showed that the differences among the effects of the above- mentioned techniques were statistically significant. These findings can have implications for EFL learners, EFL teachers, and materials’ developers. Keywords: Code, Code switching, Inter-sentential switching, Tag-switching, Inter-sentential switching 1. BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Code switching, i.e., the use of more than one language in speech, has been said to follow regular grammatical and stylistic patterns (Woolford, 1983). Patterns of code switching have been described in terms of grammatical constraints and various theoretical models have been suggested to account for such constraints.
    [Show full text]
  • Enhanced Input in LCTL Pedagogy
    Enhanced Input in LCTL Pedagogy Marilyn S. Manley Rowan University Abstract Language materials for the more-commonly-taught languages (MCTLs) often include visual input enhancement (Sharwood Smith 1991, 1993) which makes use of typographical cues like bolding and underlining to enhance the saliency of targeted forms. For a variety of reasons, this paper argues that the use of enhanced input, both visual and oral, is especially important as a tool for the less- commonly-taught languages (LCTLs). As there continues to be a scarcity of teaching resources for the LCTLs, individual teachers must take it upon themselves to incorporate enhanced input into their own self-made materials. Specific examples of how to incorpo- rate both visual and oral enhanced input into language teaching are drawn from the author’s own experiences teaching Cuzco Quechua. Additionally, survey results are presented from the author’s Fall 2010 semester Cuzco Quechua language students, supporting the use of both visual and oral enhanced input. Introduction Sharwood Smith’s input enhancement hypothesis (1991, 1993) responds to why it is that L2 learners often seem to ignore tar- get language norms present in the linguistic input they have received, resulting in non-target-like output. According to Sharwood Smith (1991, 1993), these learners may not be noticing, and therefore not consequently learning, particular target language forms due to the fact that they lack perceptual salience in the linguistic input. Therefore, in order to stimulate the intake of form as well as meaning, Sharwood Smith (1991, 1993) proposes improving the quality of language input through input enhancement, involving increasing the saliency of lin- guistic features for both visual input (ex.
    [Show full text]
  • A Study of Chinese Second-Year English Majors' Code Switching
    ISSN 1799-2591 Theory and Practice in Language Studies, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 364-369, February 2015 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0502.17 A Study of Chinese Second-year English Majors’ Code Switching Phenomenon in Comprehensive English Course from the Perspective of Interlanguage Lili Cui Department of English, Guangdong University of Petrochemical Technology, Maoming, Guangdong Province, China Xianchun Xie Department of English, Guangdong University of Petrochemical Technology, Maoming, Guangdong Province, China Abstract—The paper analyzes functions and influencing factors of second-year English majors’ code switching in Comprehensive English Course on the basis of the interlanguage theory and other SLA (second language acquisition) models, i.e. Krashen’s Comprehensible Input Hypothesis and Affective Filter Hypothesis, Long’s Interaction Hypothesis and Swain’s Comprehensible Output Hypothesis. Index Terms—interlanguage, SLA, learners’ code switching in EFL classroom, functions, influencing factors I. INTRODUCTION Code is a neutral form, and it refers to the linguistic sign of any type. As Hudson states, code switching is to switch lingual varieties in bilingual or multilingual contexts. And learners’ code switching in EFL (English as a Foreign Language) class is the phenomenon that learners insert phonetic forms, vocabulary, phrases, sentences of MT (Mother Tongue) into English-dominated expressions or the activity that learners consciously or unconsciously inlay speech segments of MT into the grammatical system of English in the conversion between the two languages. There are many features of previous learners’ code switching in EFL class. Firstly, current classroom code switching studies are mostly conducted in primary schools, middle schools and non-English majors’ EFL classes in universities.
    [Show full text]
  • Input, Interaction, and Second Language Development
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Lancaster E-Prints SSLA, 21, 557±587. Printed in the United States of America. INPUT, INTERACTION, AND SECOND LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT An Empirical Study of Question Formation in ESL Alison Mackey Georgetown University This study examines the relationship between different types of con- versational interaction and SLA. Long's (1996) updated version of the interactionist hypothesis claims that implicit negative feedback, which can be obtained through negotiated interaction, facilitates SLA. Similar claims for the benefits of negotiation have been made by Pica (1994) and Gass (1997). Some support for the interaction hypothesis has been provided by studies that have explored the effects of interaction on production (Gass & Varonis, 1994), on lexical acquisition (Ellis, Tanaka, & Yamazaki, 1994), on the short-term outcomes of pushed output (see Swain, 1995), and for specific interactional features such as recasts (Long, Inagaki, & Ortega, 1998; Mackey & Philp, 1998). However, other studies have not found effects for interaction on gram- matical development (Loschky, 1994). The central question ad- dressed by the current study was: Can conversational interaction facilitate second language development? The study employed a pre- test-posttest design. Adult ESL learners (N = 34) of varying L1 back- grounds were divided into four experimental groups and one control I am grateful to Susan M. Gass and Charlene Polio for insightful suggestions and help with this paper. I also want to thank Patsy Lightbown, Michael H. Long, Teresa Pica, and Merrill Swain for many helpful comments on the doctoral dissertation from which this paper arose. I am much indebted to Ian Thornton for assistance with the statistical analysis and discussions of many of the issues in- volved in this study.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relative Effects of Enhanced and Non-Enhanced Structured Input on L2 Acquisition of Spanish Past Tense
    THE RELATIVE EFFECTS OF ENHANCED AND NON-ENHANCED STRUCTURED INPUT ON L2 ACQUISITION OF SPANISH PAST TENSE by Silvia M. Peart, B.A, M.A., M.A. A Dissertation In SPANISH Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Tech University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Spanish Approved Andrew P. Farley Idoia Elola Greta Gorsuch Janet Perez Susan Stein Fred Hartmeister Dean of the Graduate School May, 2008 Copyright 2008, Silvia M. Peart Texas Tech University, Silvia M. Peart, May 2008 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank first my mentor, advisor and friend, Dr. Andrew Farley. His guidance helped me learn not only the main topics of second language acquisition, but also led me to develop as a professional. It has been a pleasure to work with him these last three years. I thank him for his support this last year, his mentoring and patience. I want also to express my gratitude to Dr. Idoia Elola whose support also has been a key to my success as a doctoral student. Her encouragement and assistance during this last year has been the fuel that kept me in motion. I would like to thank Dr. Susan Stein and Dr. Beard for their friendship and their encouraging support in all my projects as a student. Finally, I would like to thank my committee for their invaluable feedback. I am also grateful to the friends I made during my career at Texas Tech University. It was also their support that encouragement that kept me on track all these years.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Networking and Second Language Acquisition: Exploiting
    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Graduate Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 2011 Social networking and second language acquisition: Exploiting Skype™ Chat for the purpose of investigating interaction in L2 English learning Mallory Leigh Dalton Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd Part of the English Language and Literature Commons, and the Rhetoric and Composition Commons Recommended Citation Dalton, Mallory Leigh, "Social networking and second language acquisition: Exploiting Skype™ Chat for the purpose of investigating interaction in L2 English learning" (2011). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 10221. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/10221 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Social networking and second language acquisition: Exploiting Skype Chat for the purpose of investigating interaction in L2 English learning by Mallory Leigh Dalton A thesis submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Major: Teaching English as a Second Language/Applied Linguistics Program of Study Committee: Volker Hegelheimer, Major Professor Tammy Slater Michelle Tremmel Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2011 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES iii LIST OF TABLES iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v ABSTRACT vi CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1 Research Questions 3 Organization of the Study 4 CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 5 SLA Using an Interactionist Framework 6 Strengths of Using Synchronous CMC 11 Interlocutor Native Language 20 CHAPTER 3.
    [Show full text]
  • The Interaction Hypothesis: a Literature Review
    The interaction hypothesis: A literature review Tran-Hoang-Thu Alliant International University [email protected] November 17th 2009 Abstract This paper will examine the interaction hypothesis (IH) in second language acquisition (SLA). To begin with a short discussion of the confusing terms in SLA such as theory, model, hypothesis, and construct will be done so as to help readers easily understand theories in the field of SLA and related concepts. Next, what the IH is, and who proposed it will be discussed in detail. How the IH has evolved and has been modified since its inception will then be pointed out. The origins of the IH will also be discussed. In addition, the role of the IH in the field of SLA will be presented together with its positive contributions as well as its caveats. Research studies that support the hypothesis and those that do not support it will both be listed. Moreover, all the constructs in the IH will be delineated. The implications that the hypothesis has for SLA pedagogical research will also be mentioned. Overall, the hypothesis can probably be considered as one of the most persuasive in current SLA literature. 1 To understand the literature in the field of SLA, a good understanding of certain commonly used terms in the field is needed and such terms as theory, model, hypothesis, and construct may appear confusing to some people. Therefore, a brief overview of these terms will be addressed. To begin with a theory, as VanPatten and Williams (2007) pointed out, at its most fundamental level, is a set of statements about natural phenomena which explains why these phenomena happen the way they do.
    [Show full text]
  • Identifying Linguistic Cues That Distinguish Text Types: a Comparison of First and Second Language Speakers
    Identifying Linguistic Cues that Distinguish Text Types: A Comparison of First and Second Language Speakers Scott A. Crossley, Max M. Louwerse and Danielle S. McNamara (Mississippi State University and University of Memphis) Crossley, Scott A, Max M. Louwerse and Danielle S. McNamara. (2008). Identifying Linguistic Cues that Distinguish Text Types: A Comparison of First and Second Language Speakers. Language Research 44.2, 361-381. The authors examine the degree to which first (L1) and second language (L2) speakers of English are able to distinguish between simplified or authen- tic reading texts from L2 instructional books and whether L1 and L2 speak- ers differ in their ability to process linguistic cues related to this distinction. These human judgments are also compared to computational judgments which are based on indices inspired by cognitive theories of reading process- ing. Results demonstrate that both L1 and L2 speakers of English are able to identify linguistic cues within both text types, but only L1 speakers are able to successfully distinguish between simplified and authentic texts. In addition, the performance of a computational tool was comparable to that of human performance. These findings have important implications for second lan- guage text processing and readability as well as implications for material de- velopment for second language instruction. Keywords: second language reading, text readability, materials development, text processing, psycholinguistics, corpus linguistics, computa- tional linguistics 1. Introduction Recent research has demonstrated that text readability for second language (L2) learners is better measured using cognitively inspired indices based on theories of text comprehension as compared to readability formulas that de- pend on surface level linguistic features (Crossley, Greenfield & McNamara 2008).
    [Show full text]
  • The Effect of Input Enhancement, Individual Output, and Collaborative Output on Foreign Language Learning: the Case of English Inversion Structures
    RESLA 26 (2013), 267-288 THE EFFECT OF INPUT ENHANCEMENT, INDIVIDUAL OUTPUT, AND COLLABORATIVE OUTPUT ON FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNING: THE CASE OF ENGLISH INVERSION STRUCTURES SHADAB JABBARPOOR* Islamic Azad University, Garmrar Branch (Iran) ZIA TAJEDDIN Allameh Tabataba ‘i University (Iran) ABSTRACT. The present study compares the short term and long term effects of three focus-on-form tasks on the acquisition of English inversion structures by EFL learners. It also quantitatively investigates learners’ trend of development during the process of acquisition. Ninety freshmen from a B.A. program in TEFL were randomly divided into the three task groups. The tasks included textual enhancement in Group 1 and dictogloss in Group 2 and 3, where texts were reconstructed individually and collaboratively, respectively. Alongside a pretest and a posttest, production tests were administered to assess the trend of development in each group. Results revealed that the impacts of input and collaborative output tasks were greater than that of the individual output task. Moreover, the findings documented that the trend of development in the output group was not a linear additive process, but a rather U-shaped one with backsliding. This study supports previous studies that have combined enhancement with instructional assistance. KEY WORDS. Collaborative output, individual output, input enhancement, dictogloss, inversion structures. RESUMEN. Este estudio compara los efectos a corto y largo plazo de tres tareas de foco en la forma en la adquisición de estructuras de inversión por parte de apren- dices de inglés como lengua extranjera. Asimismo, se presenta una investigación cuan- titativa de las pautas de desarrollo durante el proceso de adquisición.
    [Show full text]
  • The Readability of Reading Passages in Prescribed English Textbooks and Thai National English Tests
    THE READABILITY OF READING PASSAGES IN PRESCRIBED ENGLISH TEXTBOOKS AND THAI NATIONAL ENGLISH TESTS BY MISS THANAPORN SRISUNAKRUA A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING LANGUAGE INSTITUTE THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC YEAR 2018 COPYRIGHT OF THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY Ref. code: 25615621320109NCD THE READABILITY OF READING PASSAGES IN PRESCRIBED ENGLISH TEXTBOOKS AND THAI NATIONAL ENGLISH TESTS BY MISS THANAPORN SRISUNAKRUA A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING LANGUAGE INSTITUTE THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC YEAR 2018 COPYRIGHT OF THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY Ref. code: 25615621320109NCD (1) Thesis Title THE READABILITY OF READING PASSAGES IN PRESCRIBED ENGLISH TEXTBOOKS AND THAI NATIONAL ENGLISH TESTS Author Ms. Thanaporn Srisunakrua Degree Doctor of Philosophy Major Field/Faculty/University English Language Teaching Language institute Thammasat University Thesis Advisor Associate Professor Tipamas Chumworatayee, Ph. D. Academic Year 2018 ABSTRACT Readability has long been regarded as a significant aspect in English language teaching as it provides the overall picture of a text’s difficulty level, especially in the context of teaching and testing. Readability is a practical consideration when making decisions on materials to match a text with target readers’ proficiency. A suitable difficulty level will ensure that students receive the most benefit from the materials. However, few studies have compared the readability levels of teaching and testing materials in terms of the difficulty of passages. The present study, therefore, aims to explore the readability of reading passages in English textbooks and Thai national English tests based on three aspects: readability level, linguistic characteristics, and topic areas.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Input in Second Language Acquisition: an Overview of Four Theories
    Available online at www.refaad.com BAES, 3(2)2019, 70-78 Research Article Bulletin of Advanced English Studies (BAES) Journal Homepage: https://www.refaad.com/views/BAES/home.aspx ISSN: 2617-6459 (Online) 2617-6440 (Print) The Role of Input in Second Language Acquisition: An Overview of Four Theories Nesreen Saud Alahmadi a* a Faculty of Art and Humanities, English Language Centre, Taibha University, Saudi Arabia Abstract Various theories of second language acquisition (SLA) attribute significant importance to the role of input in second language (L2) learning. The current paper attempts to explore the role of input through an overview of four theories of SLA. These theories highlight different views on the value of second language input to learners’ linguistic abilities. These theories are: the Input Hypothesis (Ellis, 1994, Krashen, 1985, 1989, Doughty & Long, 2003; Mackey & Gass 2015), the Input-Interaction-Output Hypothesis (Gass, 1988, 1991, 1994, 1997), the Input and Interaction Hypothesis (Long, 1980, 1985, Brown, 2007, Long, 2016) and the Autonomous Induction Theory (Carroll, 1999, 2001, 2007, Loewen & Sato 2017). Also, the role of interaction for L2 input will be discussed. In fact, learners’ acquisition of L2 depends on different factors, either external or internal as well as on learners’ experience of the language. Therefore, accounts of successful SLA have emphasised the influence of the quality of the input provided to learners, as it counts as one of these external factors. However, input alone cannot facilitate L2 learning, as learners cannot develop full linguistic ability in the target language without processing and practicing the transmitted information through interaction.
    [Show full text]